Quote Originally Posted by BisectedBrioche View Post
I'm not really sure where to even begin there (the idea that men and women are immutable categories just sort of appeared in the Victorian era, so it's not as if anyone needed to invent it in the 20th century); it's hard to argue the logic in an illogical argument, even to play devil's advocate. I'd recommend Whipping Girl by Julia Serano for the history of trans positive feminism, and how it interacted with trans exclusive feminist movements.
Thank you! I'll take a look.

Quote Originally Posted by Anonymouswizard View Post
The logic is sound, but the assumptions are faulty. Therefore the final conclusion is bad. It's like any process, if you input garbage you're not going to receive anything but garbage.

The particular faulty assumptions here are, I believe, 'sex/gender is solely related to genes/genitals' and 'sex/gender is binary'. The latter is just a particularly common faulty assumption, down to 'scientifically there are two genders' rubbish. But if you start from those two assumptions and try to use logic to get to a reason why people socially and physically transition you get to something along the lines of 'to gain access to women only spaces', and from there it's a short trip to 'transwomen are abusers'. Unfortunately I can't explain in more detail, as I don't know formal logic, but it's a pretty basic GIGO case.
So basically, "real reasons that real people have for transitioning don't exist" so any rubbish they can make up must be the "real" reason?